An analysis of secular change in the human mandible over the last century

American Journal of Human Biology

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 704-706

  Martin, D C ^a   Danforth, Marie Elaine ^b  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANTHROPOMETRY; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MALE; MANDIBLE; MIDDLE AGED; RACE; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTHROPOMETRY; CONTINENTAL POPULATION GROUPS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MANDIBLE; MIDDLE AGED; SEX FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 70350716201     PISSN: 10420533     EISSN: 15206300     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.20866     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Angel JL. 1982. A new measure of growth efficiency: skull base height. Am J Phys Anthropol 52:297-305.
2. Bass WM. 2005. Human osteology: a laboratory and field manual, 5th ed. Columbia, MO: Missouri Archaeological Society. p 365.
3. Berg GE. 2008. Discriminant function analysis applied to mandibular metrics to assess ancestral affinity, in Annual Meetings of the American Association of Forensic Scientists, Washington.
4. Buikstra JE, Ubelaker DH. 1994. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Fayetteville, AR: Archaeological Survey Research Series 44. p 218.
5. Danforth ME. 2005. The use of mandibular measurements in the assessment of ancestry, in Annual Meetings of the American Association of Forensic Scientists, New Orleans.
6. Jantz RL. 2001. Cranial change in Americans: 1850-1975. J For Sci 46:784-787.
7. Jantz RL. 2004. The meaning and consequences of morpological variation, in Annual Meetings of the American Anthropological Association, Chicago.
8. Jantz RL, Jantz LM. 2000. Secular change in craniofacial morphology. Am J Hum Biol 12:327-338.
9. Jonke E, Prossinger H, Bookstein F, Schaefer K, Bernhard M, Freudenthaler J. 2007. Secular trends in the facial skull from the 19th century to the present, analyzed with geometric morphometrics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthoped 132:63-70.
10. Komar DA, Grivas C. 2008. Manufactured populations: what do contemporary reference skeletal collections represent? A comparative study using the Maxwell Museum documented collection. Am J Phys Anthropol 137:224-233.
11. Ohm E, Silness J. 1999. Size of the mandibular jaw angle related to age, tooth retention, and gender. J Oral Rehabil 26:883-891.
12. Ousley SD, Jantz RL. 1997. The Forensic Data Bank: documenting skeletal trends in the United States. In: Reichs KJ, editor. Forensic osteology. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. p 441-458.
13. SPSS for Windows, Rel. 15.0. 2007. Chicago: SPSS Inc.
14. Truesdell ND. 2005. Secular change in the skull between American blacks and whites, Unpublished M.A. thesis, Baton Rouge: Department of Geography and Anthropology, Louisiana State University. p 57.
15. Wescott DJ, Jantz RJ. 2001. Assessing craniofacial secular change in American Blacks and Whites using geometric morphometry. In: Slice DE, editor. Modern morphometrics in physical anthropology. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. p 231-245.
16. Wilson RJ, Algee-Hewitt BFB, Meadows Jantz L. 2008. Modeling mortality in the Forensic Anthropology Center's body donation program. Am J Phys Anthropol Suppl 46:224.